Have searched the Sony forum, found some talk of zoom lenses but nothing quite what I'm asking here which is, recommendations on budget zoom lenses.

Sony DSLR-A300 (with 18-70 kit lens) owners, first DSLR, the thing stays on automatic mode all the time. We are quite happy with the pictures we have been able to capture with this camera, as well as the quality. My wife hasn't spent any time learning about how to use the camera This is a fact that will not change, so I see no reason to buy a more expensive zoom lens.

We want to get a zoom lens for outdoor use -- sporting events, kids running around, etc.

Top performance is NOT a factor; price is.

I'm trying to learn some of the basics, but things like 'beercan' are foreign concepts to me. Have read some user reviews on 3 lenses that I'm considering; would love opinions from you folks on these or anything else under $200.

If you want to keep it all with your noob juice, you may just want to get the Sony 18-250, which is actually a very good performing superzoom, and the one lens you'll ever attach to it. It would be a little more than those other lens though.

I'd ditch the Auto mode. It just takes a very simple understanding to jump into S or A (Shutter or Aperture priority modes), and you can have a lot better control over the end result there.

Thanks for the prompt reply and sound advice. I continue to try and push my spouse to learn more about the camera and photography, but there's not much interest in doing that so far.

I'd LOVE to have a single-lens solution, for the convenience factor.

Unfortunately, the Sony 18-250 lens looks to be in the $500-600 range and that is not workable right now. The Tamron and Sigma offerings seem to be in that price neighborhood (on the low end of the range) as well.

I'm willing to consider ebay, craigslist, or other local/used lenses but it is somewhat daunting when I don't know much about lenses.

Of the three lenses mentioned, I'd lean towards the Tamron 70-300. The Tamron 75-300 is an old lens and I'm not aware it is any better than the current one. The Sigma is inferior optical quality unless you get the APO version, and even then, I think Tamron have a slight build quality advantage.

I would beware the Sigma 70-300. There are many reports on the lens gear stripping on the Sony Mount due to the internal gears being made out of plastic. If it was 1 or 2 people, it wouldn't be a big concern, but there's quite a population...

However, for what it's worth, it is a great lens. sharp and with a 1:2 macro ability. Just be careful.

I'm not all that familiar with the superzooms pricings, but the 18-250 would be the top dog in price. Does anybody here know if you could find an 18-200 or 28-200 or one of those other superzooms for ~ $200?

And yeah wow checked ebay on that 18-250, and its basically getting the same as MSRP.

Are the Tamron 28-200mm lenses in the following listings actually an older, Sony Alpha DSLR compatible version of the lens (without the 'XR' and 'Di') ? It sounds like they are compatible with Sony Alpha DSLRs (ours is an A300) but I am not certain. My understanding is that the older version is heavier, slightly larger, and better built because of more metal and less plastic compared with the newer version. But are the 2 listings below actually the older version, or something different (perhaps TWO versions old)? They look nothing like the Tamron 28-200mm lens I have been reading about.

The third one is the newer one, and the XR designation means theyre using Tamrons 'Extra Refractive' optics, which are generally better performing optics then the others, and smaller and lighter. The first one is 465 grams and the second is 354 grams, surprisingly this does actually make a difference in the feel and function of it.

As a guideline, you can look up the user reviews in dyxum's lens database. There seem to be FOUR Tamron 28-200 models in there with only the XR models getting half decent scores.

Depending on how much you can find it for, maybe consider the current Tamron 55-200 lens if only 200mm is adequate. This lens used to be dirt cheap yet gives great optical performance above its price, but I haven't kept up to current prices. Otherwise, the 70-300 earlier would give the best range for minimal cost.

Thanks folks. Perhaps I will review again the Dyxum user reviews. I've spent some time there but as a novice, it is hard for me to match up the particular version of the lens on the Dyxum site with the lens on the various retailer websites where I'm looking to buy.

with the links from Anbesol, I see now that the Dyxum site has links to related lenses -- so the four Tamron 28-200mm are all connected neatly. I hadn't noticed that before; it helps. Thanks again.

Well, after looking around a LOT at various lenses, I ordered the newest version of the Tamron 28-200mm, the 'TAMRON 28-200 f3.8-5.6 XR DI AF.' Looked at used listings on eBay, looked at other lenses with different focal lengths (55-200, 70-300, 18-200, 28-300), etc etc.

For $209 after $50 rebate, the Tamron 28-200mm was the best value/performance ratio I could find.

Thanks for all the help. Hopefully the lens will arrive in perfect condition!